Wracked with angst over the fate of our beloved and horribly misgoverned Republic, the DiploMad returns to do battle on the world wide web, swearing death to political correctness, and pulling no punches.

Featured Post

This has gotten completely out of control. I never thought I would see our country's politics reduced to the degrading levels of a Banan...

Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Obama: Losing Nixon-Slayer

Aside from classic fairy tales, or shall we say faery tales, I never cared much for stories of magic, shape-shifting, or dragons. I always found that bringing in mystical or magical forces was a cheap way for an unimaginative writer to get out of a problem in a story--much as now in modern movies we see computers used to find some magical data that clinches the case against the bad guy. I try to avoid hobbit, vampire, Alec Baldwin, and zombie movies, and, therefore, resisted watching HBOs "Game of Thrones" (GOT).Tangent Alert! Why do actors, except for Kirk Douglas, in almost every drama involving ancient Romans, Greeks, wizards, gladiators, dragons, mythical gods and beings, have to speak with British accents and use faux-Shakespearean syntax? Did Julius Caesar have a British accent? Was reading Shakespeare a requirement in ancient Rome and Greece? Just wondering. End of Tangent Alert!

OK, back to today's story. Still suffering from my knee issue, I had little to do except lie about the house, whine, growl, and complain, so my kids insisted that I watch GOT. I, reluctantly, did so. It's ok, although I could do without the magic spells, witches, dragons, and extreme violence and vulgarity. I, however, did like two characters in particular: Khal Drogo, a well-coifed Genghis Khan or Attila the Hun, who sweeps all before him, and the one called "King Slayer" for having slain a mad monarch. What does this have to do with anything important? Not much, except I like saying Khal Drogo--might name my next dog that. I also notice that just about everybody goes around armed: a good thing.

Where was I? Oh, yes, going on about Drogo and "King Slayer." I don't see any Drogos on the scene--Allan West, Bibi Netanyahu, and Ted Cruz come closest--but we do have a proven "King Slayer," well, actually a Nixon-Slayer. I speak, of course, of Bob Woodward, a long-time Washington fixture and liberal icon held up to two or three generations of journalism students as the ideal investigative newsman. It seems, however, that Obama has managed to offend Woodward. The man who brought Nixon down--well, helped Nixon bring Nixon down--has rightly labelled Obama's behavior on the international scene as a "madness." Woodward, despite being a liberal, seems to be a patriot and understands the parlous state of the international scene and the need for resolute US behavior. He underlines something which many of us on the right have long said, to wit, the President's main responsibility under the Constitution is to defend the United States from its enemies. It is not to propose or defend massive welfare and other entitlement programs; not to give vacuous speeches at college commencements; not even to play golf. No. His clearest responsibility is to be Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces and to deal with our enemies from a position of strength. He cannot say that we will not deploy a carrier to the Gulf because the GOP won't give him more money for Obamacare.

Obama is playing a stupid and dangerous poker with our nation's security, one that could cost American lives. He is playing typical urban Mayor vs. City Council politics: "Councilman, if you don't give me what I want, then I am shutting down the police and fire stations in your district." Obama, once again, has revealed himself as a mean little man with no appreciation for the role of his country in the world. He would rather put our national interests at stake than save money by not flying off on the taxpayers' money to play golf.

It is somewhat refreshing to see a "liberal icon" take note of the "madness" of King Barack I. How long before Woodward gets trashed by the liberal Mau-Mau machine and has to eat his words? We'll see.

Even David Gergen went to town a bit on O today on Anderson Cooper's show. The older journos are starting to get worried.

However, they're still buying into this notion that the furloughs are unavoidable under the law, and the emerging complaining is that Obama doesn't try to renegotiate. But that's the wrong premise. Our post's management officer stated in our country team meeting that the furloughs are voluntary at the agency level, i.e., that they don't have to furlough if there is another way to cut expenses. So that means that Holder, Napolitano and every one else really ARE intentionally harming America, basically as punishment for the citizenry not voting 100% Democrat. There's the real scandal. It makes me literally sick--America's not supposed to be like that....

Oh, haven't you noticed? He has already been ostracized by Obama lapdog media.. He was saying a lot of unflattering things about Obama before the election, guess where? Hannity. They would not have him on any of the lefty shows. I don't think his book about Obama which was quite critical of him got much mention on the lefty circuit. So much so that he jumped the shark and went to Fox to peddle it and may be he is still angry.

Trashed? I'd say he should worry more about a car accident. The guy who was going to testify in the federal case involving Obama's history was murdered in Chicago last week. No one even noticed. I wouldn't be surprised if Woodward disappeared soon too. It's a good lesson to others considering apostasy. Chicago politics at its roughest.

Dear Dip,You stay off the knee and on the keyboard, like a good boy, and consider moving to Texas. Get your family out of idiot land, yes, I know it is pretty but we have a governor with sense, the state is financial sound, and we wear our guns (I do only on far western ranch where rattlesnakes abide in great measure!)

SO, funeral showers are out. What about Texas barbeques? Fishing in a gorgeous lake, where you can row a boat? Taking snapping turtles off your line (it will give you adventure like you had in your old days!--I mean have YOU ever taken a snapper off a fishing line?) Once I had a daughter walk on water on the same lake, as her brother started to take one off a trot line and throw back into the lake she was swimming in!

Our 70 temps in the day have faded to 50's but hey, it's Texas, where you can have 90 and 30, in the same day. It adds to our variety (never a dull moment here), and the colder temps are preserving a slower rate of flowers blooming, and I love that. I mean the Spring in East Texas should be one of the wonders of the world.

Yep, I expected the brown-nosed Journ-o-lists to be on this immediately like flies on Obama. Color me not surprised.

I am, however, not at all pleased that Woodward has ignored all the other problems with Obama to concentrate on the sequester. I suppose it is possible that he may have been looking into all the other problems with the Obama administration and been effectively silenced by the apparatchiks in the media. Perhaps somebody that has read his book can let us know.

The only reason Woodward's Nixon story was so big is because the MSM hated Nixon with a passion. They took Woodward's story and yelled its content until they were hoarse. That's what brought Nixon down as much as Watergate itself.

Somehow, I doubt the MSM is in the same frame of mind with Obama. They seem to be enthralled with the first post constitutional government.

The MSM is losing readers and viewers by the day because people just don't care for propaganda and, as a result, staff is undergoing termination or pay cuts.

Said staff (and management) doesn't seem to have a clue about cause and effect. They must all have master's degrees in indocrination.

Seriously, when I read a story or watch a report on a subject in which I'm not necessarily on the cutting edge but know enough about it to make an informed decision, I'm shocked at how incredibly wrong the story is, often reporting results that are, um, not in any way related to reality as we know it.

It would be really nice to have people covering stories in which they actually understand the subject matter, but then we'd have to admit that a journalism degree is worthless.

"Seriously, when I read a story or watch a report on a subject in which I'm not necessarily on the cutting edge but know enough about it to make an informed decision, I'm shocked at how incredibly wrong the story is, often reporting results that are, um, not in any way related to reality as we know it."

Are you familiar with "Gell-Mann Amnesia?" Here's Michael Crichton's definition: “Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.”

So, I was wondering if you read other articles believing they are accurate because you aren't personally familiar with the subject. I catch myself doing it all the time. It's infuriating because there isn't any news you can trust. And the reporters don't seem to see this as a problem, they have no interest in learning about...anything! They have the Journalism degree and that makes them experts on everything.

Obama et al are playing the role of Sir Humphrey in the old BBC show Yes, Minister to a T. Facing a threatened budget cut, choose to cut in the most malignant and visibly damaging possible way, never admit that there is waste or fat that can be cut. One of the oldest tricks in the Bureaucrats Book of Tricks.I do not understand why nobody is explicitly accusing the administration of resorting to bureaucratic trickery in its description of how services that would need to be cut

The "Yes Minister" and "Yes Prime Minister" books are the equivalent of Machiavelli for the 20th and 21st Centuries.

The scary thing about them is that the writers made the stories up as tongue in cheek fiction BUT the politicians who discussed the ploys with them said in effect "Well I can't say that actually happened but let me tell you about ...". They then described a more outrageous scenario.

It is often said that collaborators feed the monster in the hopes they will be eaten last. Woodward and Lanny Davis might be beginning to realize the truth of that analogy. Once a dictator has consolidated power he turns his attention to his own, from whence history has shown, his most effective attack will come.

Back in the day, every new Prez was tested by the Soviet Union to see what kind of poker player he was on the national scene. I think Prez's have gotten lazy on that game except for President Bush in 2001 having to deal with China's downing of a P-3 over international airspace. Obama hasn't been tested by the Chinese head on but clearly on the margins Obama has been tested and appears to be in full retreat so can a direct Chinese challenge to US national interests be coming soon?

Obama said the Norks will be punished for developing nukes and ICBM's and now they have both and looking to sell.

Iran was supposed to be suffering under the most extreme sanctions imaginable under the Obama Admin and Iran has been funding and sending observers to Nork nuke tests and ICBM tests. Iran is galloping towards having what Obama said they couldn't have.

Iran and the Norks are allies and satellites of China who get military, scientific and economic benefits from the Middle Kingdom so in a real sense China has been challenging the US with proxies, as the old Soviet Union once did, and forcing the US to back down from defending its allies and US national interests.

Soon China will test whether the US will behave the same when it directly challenges the US, in the Pacific and it probably won't be Taiwan that is the issue. More likely Japan will be faced with a fait accompli over an island and China will want to know what the US will do.

Put yourself in the Prime Minister of Japan or South Korea's head today as they witness US retreat from the Middle East, their major sources of petro. Do you think they lose any sleep over the question "will the US come?" I'm sure they are ambien users by now. Now imagine the Chinese take one of many islands they claim and it just happens the island is claimed by Japan too and Obama reacts by going to the UN.How long before Japan and South Korea make peace with Beijing and show the Chinese military all the shiny toys the US military as sold them while at the same time showing the US the door to exit their countries?

If something like that happened, at least we'd have Brian Williams telling us what a "responsible statesmen, Lincolnesqe almost, President Obama has become".

Diplomad, the left wing taking head, from the Huffington (Puffington) Post to the yakkers at the alphabet networks, have all drawn the long knives against Woodword. Hell, according to them, he's just a senile old fool (who was heralded as the bastion of journalism by them just days ago) who needs to be put out to pasture, or at least locked up in some asylum. One even asked "Will Woodward go 'birther' next?"

The treatment that Bob Woodward is now getting from his own is telling. But what they don't realize is that Bob Woodward is respected by the American public, just as Walter Cronkite (a radical left winger) was. They are now eating their own and it will come back to haunt them.

I actually wrote Bob Woodward a letter of support, identifying myself as a denizen of a deep indigo state and descendant of European 'Forty-eighters and Social Democrats. I told him that I thought Obama was a pouty, thin-skinned narcissist and that his administration seems to have troubles with the First Amendment, and that Mr. Woodward ought to hang tough.

I can't agree more with the preceeding several posters. Will Obama get off the golf links and come run the country or, are we on an autopath to doom?Hats off to Mr. Woodward and his finally telling the truth (did you think this was the first time the O admin "advised" him of their thoughts?)I firmly believe that the 2.4 cut in the rate of spending will cause the admin and the Democrat party to wreck extreme pain on the American populace. Much like municipal gov'ts have said "if you don't allow us the spending increases we will cut your firefighters, police and teachers."I have seen it all before on a smaller scale. This time we have a man like Woodward standing up and saying, hold on a minute, it was the O admin that proposed this...Quite frankly, I don't care who proposed it. This is a bad idea whose time has come!Anyone with a 12th grade literacy level could go in there and cut the bloat out of the Federal budget. It makes me very sad that since Romney lost we are still having these conversations while the family of the presidency spends more on one vacation than the entire royal family of the UK does in a year.Something is very wrong here.

On the literary component of the post, if you're enjoying *any* part of the GoT, don't, I repeat, DO NOT, look into the politics of the author, George R.R. Martin. Man's a good writer but a political idiot.

About Me

W. Lewis Amselem, long time US Foreign Service Officer; now retired; served all over the world and under all sorts of conditions. Convinced the State Department needs to be drastically slashed and reformed so that it will no longer pose a threat to the national interests of the United States.